Summary of Legislation in Juvenile Crime Essay Example

Introduction

Juvenile crime is considered to be among the serious problems which affect the United States of America. There are a variety of concerns which the public, state, federal and local government's officials share concerning juvenile crime. According to Sykes and Matza (2017), Juvenile crime concerns continue to grow. There is a radical rise in juvenile violence which has its roots in the 1980s. The violence was at its peak in the early 1990s. Even though these crimes seem to have reduced during the mid-1990s, the reduction had not relieved the apprehension. Some states have embarked on taking a harder legislative position about juvenile delinquency between the 1970s and the 1980s. During this period, there was a reported reduction in juvenile delinquency. Sykes and Matza (2017) further explains that federal reformers were active in urging prevention and also coming up with punitive prevention measures of curbing the issue of juvenile delinquency. The dissonance between what was taking place between the state and conflict during this period could be the cause of the significant changes in the legal procedures which made juvenile courts to process similar cases.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Most crime policies in the United States are directed to considering juveniles as adults, despite the fact that the minors to grow up in environments which does not offer the essential resources for survival. There are fewer opportunities and resources in such situations to support young people. The environment is unhealthy and unproductive, and as a result, the settings subject them to delinquency.

Hawkins and Weis (2017) explains that the United States justice system came up with the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act with an objective to support children, families, and youth who were involved crime. Federal standards of custody and care guard the legislation through upholding the safety of the community and also establishing prevention of victimization. The law provided for the setting up of a federal agency where the bureau of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention trains, offers technical support, evaluation and investigation and model programs aimed at supporting the state and the local systems. The legislation also provided for enhancements in local and state juvenile justice programs where delinquency is prevented. Lastly, the law provided for a juvenile advisory system and justice planning in all states, districts, and territories.

Hawkins and Weis (2017) further explains that the legislation had four essential necessities. These were deinstitutionalization of status lawbreakers, adult jail and lockup removal, sound and sight sound separation and uneven marginal contact. The first obligation stated that status criminals were minors charged with adjudicated conduct which would not be a crime in case an adult commits it. Examples are persistent truancy, violation of curfew laws, possession of tobacco and alcohol and also running away. The second requirement (lockup removal and adult jail) focused on eliminating juveniles from confinement amenities and adult jails. The third requirement (sound and separation) ensured that status offenders, arbitrated delinquents and non-offending minors are not restricted in any organization where they may be in direct interaction with adult inmates. The last requirement looked at the reduction of the disproportionate sum of juveniles who are in connection with the juvenile justice system.

Implications of the Legislation on Children

The Juvenile Justice Delinquency and Prevention act set criteria for caring for the youths and children involved in the justice system for the juveniles in conjunction with the federal law. The legislation has managed to provide critical funds for the management of juvenile justice across the United States. The juvenile justice system disproportionately impacts the youths. When the legalization was re-authorized in 2002, it has managed to set up programs which aim to reduce and prevent delinquency. The impact is that there is a notable decrease in cases of misconduct with about 50% (Siegel & Welsh, 2014).

The legislation has also managed to provide incentives and limited funding to various federations to deinstitutionalize status crimes. The legislation has also managed to avert the employment of status lawbreakers because detaining the former class could not be justified legally and it was also morally reprehensible.

Also, the policy has also managed to reduce the juveniles arrested and detained for status crimes. The legislation played an essential role in setting up a system which helps the juvenile justice system to take care of significant percentage of status crimes. For instance, in 2004, the juvenile justice system managed to process approximately 160,000 juvenile rank criminal cases. The system also retained 7% of the status criminals in detention. These also include girls who represent status lawbreakers disproportionately. According to Siegel and Welsh (2014), girls represent about 44% of all the status crimes, including the 62% escapees.

Through the legislation, convicted children received essential protections. It was during the 1980s when the legislation was in effect. Juveniles were not facing detention for status offenses. Most of the juvenile court judges convinced the Congress that the total ban on locking up status criminals could not work out correctly.

The re-authorization of the policy in 1992 also added a new necessity where countries which were under the receivership of federal support ought to surrender an annual strategy which contains an examination of gender-specific services applied in the treatment or prevention of juvenile delinquency. These include the type of services provided to the females; and plans for delivering the essential gender-specific services essential in the treatment and prevention of juvenile misbehavior. The legislation, therefore, provided an opportunity for granting states with funds which were used in implementing the programs. Juvenile delinquents, thus, started receiving preferential treatment after the legislation became law. The primary focus of the law was to provide treatment at the expense of the harsher prison of jail time.

According to Hawkins and Weis (2017), social workers play an essential role in the justice system in the implementation of the legislation. Juvenile justice system impacts families, individuals, and communities. Social workers work to strengthen families and communities and prevent youth incarceration. Social workers assist the children during their time of arrest, For instance, presenting the child to police during questioning. They also provide emotional support to the child. They suggest pretrial solutions other than remand in custody which is acceptable to all parties.

The legislation impacts social workers through the initiatives which focus on prejudice, stereotypes and how people make judgments about juveniles. The policy involves the district attorneys, juvenile court judges, health and human services representatives and also police officers. These parties play an essential role in building new coalitions to decrease the number of juveniles in the justice system. The legislation enabled social workers to involve youths active participation in county, city, state and national levels.

How the Legislation Relates to other Systems

During the amendment of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Reauthorization Act in 1974 form of the same legislation, the legislation expanded the state plans such as acquiescence with necessities of the act in guarding imprisoned children. The legislation provided alternatives for detention for those juveniles who were first-time offenders and also enhanced the identification of ethnic and racial disparities within the juvenile justice system.

The legislation relates to the juvenile justice system by providing an opportunity through which the court could exercise its authority and control over the minors under the policy. Before the policy was affected, the juvenile justice system encountered challenges in its legality, especially through lacking practical and due process fortifications which are afforded to juveniles. The legislation also enabled the justice system to establish juvenile courts. The legislation limited the involvement of the federal governments, children's bureau, and other federal agencies which could take part in providing technical support to juvenile courts.

The legislation enabled the justice system to gain procedural protections. There were limited cases of juveniles facing charges. Initially, judges claimed that the courts did not have the mandate to deal with habitual and chronic status offenders presented before the justice system.

Initially, the primary concern of the juvenile justice system was to treat young people differently than adults about the sanctions and the criminal process. The impact is however evident in the increased cases of juvenile crime within American society. The situation has shifted the perception of social workers towards juvenile justice system and the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (JJDPA). Social workers, therefore, find it very challenging to come up with ways of preventing rampant issues such as violent crimes which younger individuals commit.

Hewitt and DeLisi (2016) agrees that the system affects the justice system by giving social workers the opportunity to work within the justice system. There is a wide range of tasks which are allocated to social workers when the children and their parents are coming into contact with the justice system about the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. Social workers play an essential role from the moment a child is apprehended or arrested to the time the child is appropriately disposed within the juvenile system.

Social workers also interface with the justice system through working alongside the justice system, though independently within the juvenile system. It directly relates to the primary prevention role which social workers perform in connection to the elements of secondary prevention. It is essential to make social services which can be accessed on a self-referral basis to reply to any family or individual facing difficulties appropriately. Social workers, therefore, help in identifying and responding to families where children are at risk and giving such families the opportunity to address the root causes of the presenting complications such as delinquency, violence, and neglect.

Possible JJDPA Changes to Improve Welfare of Children

Hewitt and DeLisi (2016) elucidates that the United States Senate has taken steps to reauthorize the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act to help in understanding the challenges of delinquency prevention. Given the opportunity to re-write the legislation to achieve the goals of the legislation, I would make the following changes to improve the outcomes for children in the juvenile justice system. To begin with, I would extend the requirement about the requirements about the removal of the juveniles from the adult lockups and jails. I would ensure that sound separation and sight between adult inmates and youths in situations where they are confined together. The objective of this change is to protect all the teenagers and children held pre-adjudication when they face trials in the juveniles or criminal courts.

I can also work on increasing funding which can be used in providing technical assistance and training. Training and technical assistance would act as alternatives to detaining the juveniles as a way of supporting a continuum of research-based services to meet the unmet needs of youths and their families involved in court cases. Restoring funding would provide an opportun...